Featured Hyles, Riplinger, Ruckman

God gave by inspiration all the original language words of the New Testament to the NT prophets and apostles, and if those words included any actual translated words they are actually part of the giving of the New Testament revelation and part of that miracle of inspiration.

That is not the same thing as the translating of the Scriptures into English in the 1500's or in the 1600's by men who were not given their renderings by any direct miracle of inspiration.

Your attempted comparison is invalid.

 

But not the KJVO myth. That was a later, TOTALLY-MAN-MADE invention.

 

IF we want to go down this heresy pathway as some strident KJVO seem to get to with the Kjv superior to the originals even...

How can we be sure that God did not "inspire" the Queen james version, or Charasmactic Chaos bibles, per their reasoning and logic, for God would keep be improving his versions to us, so why not those as His "perfect" editions now?

 

What is just as bad as the KJVO nutballs are those who treat their heresy as if it is a legitimate issue to debate.

 

One and the same, aren't they?

 

Well, we can't just IGNORE it; if we do, some newbie will possibly think it's right.

 

That is precisely the problem with ignoring it.

 

You have got to be kidding!! Equating God moving a human from one place to another with translating the Word of God into another language??

This proves you don't know 1611 English, because in 1611 "translating, translation" had a wider meaning than it does now.

 

Good point!

 

Bob, I used only the ASV 1901 till the early 70's when it became harder to find replacements and moved over to the KJV. I still like the ASV the best and have many others and a few that I read from time to time, but for the most part I use the KJV today. Very few have the ASV, so it makes it a little to follow along when I read Scripture to a group.

 

John, I've met many Christians who has fell for this KJO deal. I never heard much about it until the late 70's.

 

"Translate" was often used, 'back in the day', to mean "change from one form to another", I. E. 'Tadpoles translate into frogs.' I believe that's its use in the KJV in the verses Mak cited. While its commonest use is to change a given work from one language to another, that's far from its only meaning.

 

The Greek word in Col. 1:13 is methistemi, which means to remove (and thus to place elsewhere, as in Luke 16:4; 5 times in the NT). In Heb. 11:5 it is metatihemi, used 5 times in the NT with two main meanings, to move from one place to another (as in Acts 7:16 and I believe in Heb. 11:5), and to change the nature of (as in Jude 1:4, the meaning you've given).

So going by the way it was used in the KJV, in 1611 the word "translate" had two meanings: to remove or move, and to change into something else.

 

I think it is extremely important for a Christian to understand the words of the Bible, and thus a defender of the KJVO position such as the author of the OP should know the 1611 meaning of the words used in it--thus my objection to the misuse of the KJV word "translate."

As for the movement itself, I heard of it at Tennessee Temple in the early '70s. So it was gaining steam in the late '70s, but was still held by only a small percentage of IFBs. By the time of our first furlough in 1986 the movement had grown enough that I felt I should research it in case I was asked about it on that furlough--but not a single pastor asked my position that whole furlough, so by '86 it had still not gathered that much steam. Most knew that Ruckman was a weird radical, but unfortunately when Riplinger came around (late '90s?) many fell for her garbage who had ignored Ruckman.

 

Doc, why do you feel the movement is dying off?

 

Thank you for the detailed answer.

It does look to me too like many are drawing back from the nasty Ruckmanite radicalism of the "Dr." who is newly departed from here (and not mourned), and Riplinger is being rejected by certain groups.

 

Thing is, once a false doctrine is established, it never dies out completely, with few exceptions. while the body of KJVOs is shrinking in number, it'll never be completely gone from this present age, until the antichrist arrives. It may die 'way back, but it may be revived again if some new demagogue comes along to spread its hooey.

But, fortunately, GOD, and Freedom Readers will be here, too, to counter the KJVO myth, and all other false doctrines of worship as new ones are made and old ones revived. They'll reach their zenith when the antichrist comes to power and none of us will be here to speak against them. That's when the KJVO myth will end, as the AC will succeed in discrediting God's word completely to most of the world.

But meanwhile, we must continue to do our part in fighting this insidious false doctrine.